Blog

8

This is not really a question but more of a heads up...

They were hoping for hundreds of submissions, and they got THOUSANDS. So they had some drones pare down the field to 29, which were judged by the (albeit biased) panel. They honed it down to six. Now the readers get to vote. Of the six, I thought three were worthy of a win. The one with the most votes at the moment is extolling the virtues of test tube meat. We cannot let this happen!

I had a tough time choosing between "This is the deal we've made", and "Sometimes it's more ethical to eat meat than vegetables". I like having this sound argumentation in hand also should I ever need to defend my meat-eating ways.

So, to make this a question, which essay(s) did you like the most?

Here's the link: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/04/20/magazine/ethics-eating-meat.html#/#ethicistpoll5

flag
Thanks for the heads up! – Dragonfly Apr 21 2012 at 12:57

8 Answers

8

I found it annoying that the leading essay (at the time I voted) concluded that in vitro meat is "perhaps the only ethical meat." Only a small percentage of Americans are actually vegetarian... why do so many (presumably omnivorous) Americans seem to feel that eating any meat (even grass-fed, pastured, local) is unethical? (I'm basing this on the fact that this essay was leading in votes, but maybe it was skewed by a bunch of vegetarian voters, who knows.)

There's a strange disconnect here. I care about animals a lot and I work to ensure that all of the meat I buy comes from good, humane sources. And yet, everything has to die, including me one day. Didn't everyone see the Lion King? Death is unavoidable; quality of life is what matters. So why are people who buy crappy meat from horrible factory farms easily convinced that all meat is wrong? I think maybe most Americans are just uncomfortable with the idea of death in general. I'm disappointed that such a simplistic view of this issue dominates.

link|flag
2 
 I felt the same way. It is clear that vegetarian/vegan are both "politically correct" these days, like not smoking. It grieves me because I really like the NYT. – gydle Apr 21 2012 at 16:25
The articles aren't in "order" of most votes. I think it is randomized and refreshed each time you go on so that the order is scrambled in order to avoid a bias, as most people read the one on top first. – Sunny Beaches Apr 22 2012 at 0:12
I know. I was basing my statement on the fact that the "I'm About to Eat Meat for the First Time in 40 Years" essay had the highest percentage of votes (which the website will only show you after you vote.) I just checked the site and that essay is still in the lead by far, with 41% of the vote as of 10:30 p.m. Eastern time. – Violet9 Apr 22 2012 at 2:31
1 
 Don't feel too disappointed. Online polls are a poor method of data collection. They tend to attract biased audiences. The "leading" essay is promoted by some vegan boards and PETA. I just googled the essay title, and my suspicions seem to be confirmed...looks like a big organization with lots of followers tuned it. It is more a reflection of advertising than it is a reflection of what our society, as a whole, thinks – Sunny Beaches Apr 22 2012 at 2:49
1 
 You're probably right that the question is drawing a bigger-than-normal number of vegetarians... Oh well! Not something that's going to ruin my weekend, that's for sure! – Violet9 Apr 22 2012 at 3:42
show 2 more comments
7

I go for "This is the deal we've made."

link|flag
1 
 That's the one I voted for, too. – Alex Apr 21 2012 at 13:22
1 
 That was my choice also. – gydle Apr 22 2012 at 6:45
4

So very disappointing. The chosen array of essays indicts the integrity of the whole endeavor. Mr. Singer must be proud.

link|flag
1 
 Quite so. I didn't see anybody trying to argue with his central thesis. You'd think that would have been important. – Stabby Apr 22 2012 at 1:49
I'm entertaining the slight possibility that everyone who disagrees with the central thesis thought that it would be a waste of time and didn't enter. Because maybe they really didn't have anybody making the arguments. – Stabby Apr 22 2012 at 1:50
1 
 I thought they were passable. It's hard to make a convincing argument given the contest rules and only 600 words. – gydle Apr 22 2012 at 6:45
3

I like the ones others voted for, and I also really like "Sometimes it's more ethnical to eat meat than vegetables."

I think the underlying theme that the essays I like share center not just on the circle of life, the reality of farming, but also the idea of respect and humane treatment of animals in this "system" of human-animal relationships. I was afraid that the essays would focus on, "Of course, we need meat for the nutrition!" I think it's far more than that, because as humans with the capacity for higher-order thinking, meat is more than just an object or an item on a shelf. We have the ability to impact the earth, which won't last forever.

I like the closing paragraphs of the two. I haven't voted yet, ha.

Almost 25 years after deciding it was wrong to eat animals, I now realize that it’s not that simple. There is an ethical option — a responsibility, even — for eating animals that are raised within a sustainable farm system and slaughtered with the compassion necessitated by our relationship. That, in essence, is the deal.

And...

For me, eating meat is ethical when one does three things. First, you accept the biological reality that death begets life on this planet and that all life (including us!) is really just solar energy temporarily stored in an impermanent form. Second, you combine this realization with that cherished human trait of compassion and choose ethically raised food, vegetable, grain and/or meat. And third, you give thanks.

link|flag
4 
 Interested ting how they chose essays whose arguments have already been demolished by Singer in his books. The entire charade's a set up. Now Singer can come in, demolish the winner, and everyone will say there's no possible justification for eating meat. It's a stunt by the bien pensants to crusade for the vegan agenda. – GurlzLuvSteak Apr 21 2012 at 16:15
What? Are you talking about Peter Singer? What "arguments" are you talking about? The essays don't suggest that meat eating is wrong, just that we need to be conscious about it. – Sunny Beaches Apr 21 2012 at 17:53
4 
 I agree with Gurlz above. It seems to me the entire purpose of this exercise is to allow Peter Singer, the vegan and anti-natalist, to reply to the "winning" essay with some of his famous arguments and thus "prove" that there's no moral or rational philosophy of meat-eating. If you are unfamiliar with Singer's philosophical arguments against humanity's existence and his radical defense of veganism, you might like to read his books. Pity the "winner" who will be humiliated by his response - rom the platform of the august NYT at that. If you think this thing isn't rigged, you may not know Singer – Wowza Apr 21 2012 at 18:40
I know who Singer is. I just didn't know he was a judge, so I looked over the panel. I don't know the other judge, besides Michael Pollan. If you've read his books (I read The Omnivore's Dilemma), he eats meat and is fine with it, as long as we consider sustainability and humane treatment..basically, not eating meat blindly. The panel of judges isn't a bunch of vegans. – Sunny Beaches Apr 21 2012 at 22:23
oops, I meant *other judges – Sunny Beaches Apr 21 2012 at 22:24
2

Didn't they specifically state that discussing the relative merits of ethical treatment of the animals was not allowed? How did these entries get to be the finalists then?

link|flag
Hm, I just looked up the initial prompt. I don't think there was anything against bringing up ethical treatment of animals, just no stuff like "I eat meat because it tastes good" type of stuff. I think the phrasing of the question is confusing. With that question alone, I think that no, there is nothing wrong with meat itself. But I do think there is a problem with the way that we raise animals (at least in many "developed" countries, has changed. Very different questions, if you ask me. – Sunny Beaches Apr 22 2012 at 3:17
I also found it annoying that they were "calling in all carnivores." Dude, we don't all just chomp down meat like that. Why must it be either carnivore or vegetarian? I think it's a flawed question, but I am interested in the life of animals, but I don't think that has to do with whether eating meat is wrong. – Sunny Beaches Apr 22 2012 at 3:22
1 
 I got that from the following " Some of the more conscientious carnivores have devoted themselves to enhancing the lives of livestock, by improving what those animals eat, how they live and how they are killed. But few have tried to answer the fundamental ethical issue: Whether it is right to eat animals in the first place, at least when human survival is not at stake." and "Rules: This is a very specific contest. Don’t tell us why you like meat, why_organic_trumps_local or why your food is yours to choose. Just tell us why it’s ethical to eat meat." – Kelly Apr 22 2012 at 3:33
It seemed to me from reading that, that they had already dismissed any arguments regarding the relative treatment of the animals. – Kelly Apr 22 2012 at 3:34
2 
 Yeah, this is what I thought, too. It seemed like an impossible task to answer a question like that, when it was so skewed from the outset to be simply "tell us why killing isn't wrong". Ridiculous. – gydle Apr 22 2012 at 6:43
show 3 more comments
2

I actually entered this myself - one of the thousands that didn't make it. My argument focused on the problems within the anti-meat argument.

link|flag
1

I voted for "Sometimes it's more ethical to eat meat than vegetables" although there were I think 2 other ones that came very close.

link|flag
I actually ended up voting for that one as well. – Sunny Beaches Apr 22 2012 at 5:05
Me too, but overall I thought the writing was kind of disappointing in the whole lot. If this was the cream of the crop, did they not get many viable entries? – Happy Now Apr 22 2012 at 6:16
I wonder how many good entries were "weeded out" before they even got to the panel. – gydle Apr 22 2012 at 6:44
-2

I've been eating paleo for years now, a vegan version. Simply because killing animals is unnecessary and morally unjustifiable and wrong

link|flag

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.